I don't own a television

[Kookamoor]

In Sweden it's been suggested that the tv licence might turn into a "media licence" since they've put a lot of the programs on online. So just owning a computer with internet access might be enough for the state to demand payment for the public service television.

Sounds like the Government is just money-grubbing. How can they justify this? Surely providing the news is a public service that tax payers pay for. I mean, should someone be prevented from accessing information just because they are poor or less well-off?

In my town they are putting in free wireless networks so that everyone may have free internet (although we still pay for cable - not sure if we can pick up the network where we live). I would have thought Europe would be far more liberal minded than North America when it comes to things like free access to information. I know that's a generalisation, but in most cases they are more progressive about social issues.

Oh! I've got a great idea. How about we implement a tax on people who can read, and make them pay to use the libraries? Or what about we charge people who can walk to use the footpaths? Oh, hang on.... we already pay taxes. Am I over-reacting to this?

 

[Ronny]

I have a TV without cable and that only gets Fox in clearly, so we only use it for movies. It seems all the good shows I liked to watch are no longer on and I can't believe people like to watch what they have replaced them with. But I must be able to watch movies and my son likes to get the nature shows from the library like Blue Planet & The Life of Mammals, so I couldn't get rid of the TV all together and the Smurfs are back on Saturday mornings so we must watch that of course.

 

[Halo]

I've heard of TV licences before (don't they have them in the UK, too?). What's the justification for them?

Yes, we have them in the UK. I'm not sure how much they cost, but it's over £100 a year, possibly £124 or something (a licence for a black and white TV is slightly cheaper). It's how the BBC is funded apparently, whereas ITV, Channel 4 and Channel 5 are commercial channels funded by advertising. The excuse that you have a TV but don't watch BBC1 or 2 is not acceptable! I think blind people get 50% off, very generous I'm sure. Personally, I wish the TV licence would go the way of the radio licence and be abolished. If the BBC had to start showing adverts it wouldn't bother me - they spend five minutes between every programme promoting their own programmes and services anyway.

 

[Kookamoor]

We don't have television licences in Australia, yet the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Commission) is still publicly funded through tax payer dollars. There's been some critisism over the past few years that there have been too many funding cuts and as a result the quality of original programming has gone down. But it is still doing very well and has some great programs, including a lot of UK content. The other government television station is SBS (Special Broadcast Station), which shows a lot of foreign programming such as the news in various languages as well as international news (in English). It also has a marvellous selection of foreign films. The one problem is that the broadcast quality is not as good as the rest of the stations and so in many places it either can't be received or is received poorly (hence my ''5 channels on a good day" comment).

I guess TV licences are historical in the UK and Europe, however, so it is difficult to suddenly find the money to fund public broadcasting in another method. All the same, the concept of licencing access to the Internet is abhorent!

 

[Wolhay]

I prefer the alternative of a tv licence for those that own a tv rather than a general tax that everyone suffers from but I'd much rather see the channels privatised so that you can choose to fund them or not. Perhaps if public service only had shown news and information it could have been more justified but they mostly show entertainment (previously they've shown a show similar to the American "Survivor" for example).

I would welcome a liberal revolution that privatised all culture. The majority should not be forced to fund the entertainment of the minority or even the other way around.

 

[AbnormalButSane]

Wow. Right now we have 5 tv's, and I watch them way too much.
But soon, I too will be without a tv. No tv at boarding school
I suppose it will help me concentrate better on studies though.

 

[Robert]

I don't think I'd like not having a TV. We currently have satellite with three TVs, including one large screen (51") HDTV with surround sound. We also have a DVD player on every TV and a DVD Player/recorder on the big screen.

We don't go to the theature to see movies unless we classify a movie as a big screen event. Star Wars for instance. We usually wait until they come out on DVD, pay-per-view or one of the networks.

There isn't a lot of quality on TV, even when you have well over 100 channels. I'm a huge hockey fan, so it's I'll catch five or six games a week if I can find the time. That is to say I will (again) if the NHL and NHLPA can settle things (I'm not holding my breath). News in the evening, financial reports on Saturday, and if I'm home on a weekday morning, I'll catch some of financial news on CNBC (I'm thinking about recording some of this because it's very informative). There are some shows I'll catch when I can. Anything to do with Hot Cars, RVing, Motorcycles and Wine.

 

[Shade]

The TV licence in the UK: I think it's a good thing. The idea of BBC programmes having adverts within them is abhorrent. The reason the licence works so well is that it enables the BBC to be truly a public service broadcaster. And don't forget that as well as BBC1 and BBC2 there are TV channels BBC3 and BBC4, CBBC, CBeebies, BBC News 24, BBC Parliament, seven national radio stations, dozens of local radio stations and a wide-ranging internet service. I think it's cheap at £10 a month!

The alternatives are: advertising (no thanks, so half hour comedy shows suddenly become 22 minutes, as in the US?); state funding (unwelcome as the BBC needs to remain independent from government); or subscription, which is rather like advertising in that it would encourage dumbing down to pursue the largest number of subscribers/advertisers.

 

[Robert]

...
The alternatives are: advertising (no thanks, so half hour comedy shows suddenly become 22 minutes, as in the US?)....

Yeah, that about sums it up for a 30 min show in the US. The only channels we get without advertising of some kind is PPV. I don't know about American PBS. I don't watch it because I don't like their politics and I got tired of their breaks from the programming while they asked for money.

 

[Halo]

I truly don't think it would bother me too much if the BBC got their revenue from adverts instead of the TV licence. Yes, adverts can be annoying, but we already put up with them on the other three channels. Also, they provide a handy time to go to the toilet/put the cat out etc. What British TV really needs to sort out is showing films split by the news - first ITV did it, and now I notice the BBC is following suit.